[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20100420.182215.179278537.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 18:22:15 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: mpatocka@...hat.com
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, kaber@...sh.net
Subject: Re: crash with bridge and inconsistent handling of NETDEV_TX_OK
From: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 21:20:09 -0400 (EDT)
>
>
> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010, David Miller wrote:
>
>> From: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>
>> Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 21:10:04 -0400 (EDT)
>>
>> > I see, but GRO is turned off on my interfaces, according to ethtool.
>>
>> GRO is just a flag bit, so it's possible that if your kernel is too
>> old ethtool will always show that it's off.
>>
>> If you haven't turned off GRO explicitly, then it's a good bet that
>> this is why it looks like it's off. And GRO is on by default.
>
> I have kernel 2.6.34-rc4, ethtool 2.6.33 and GRO is off. I haven't turned
> it off, I left it on default.
See my follow-up, what ethtool output makes you think GRO is
off? "large-receive-offload" is not GRO
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists